[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Web Interface issues

To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Subject: Re: Web Interface issues
From: "Hawes, Geoff" <geoff.hawes@EMAIL.AIRBORNE.COM>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 10:11:42 -0700
Reply-to: Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView <NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU>
Sender: Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView <NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU>
Our vote, is for our web users have "view only" access. Nothing else.
In our environment we have NETOPS maintaining the status of the maps
coms links etc. So having our support analysts acknowledge faults is
confusing to the NETOPS group. The issue is scope of control. If NETOPS
is working on a problem and it is ack'd, they won't know why or by whom.

Second, we also have experienced layout problems with GIF's on the web
interface. They are not the same. In essence the web interface is of
limited value because our goal is to have both the Netview EUI and web
interface to be identical. That way anyone from NETOPS to UNIX analysts
to our management group, can be familiar and comfortable with what they are
looking at.
(Note: we have over 500 sites grouped into state maps, over a gif of the

Geoff Hawes
Airborne Express

-----Original Message-----
From: Leslie Clark [mailto:lclark@US.IBM.COM]
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 1999 9:41 AM
To: NV-L@UCSBVM.ucsb.edu
Subject: Re: Web Interface issues

1) That is a feature. No one asked me beforehand, but the developers
thought it would be neat. This is so the analyst, when he goes to a
closet and checks a device, can web back to the map and ack it for
everyone to see. Unfortunately it also means that any user with
access (limited by Netview Security, of course) can ack anything.
This is the ONLY case where someone with essentially r/o access can
have a destructive effect on what others see. Anyone who does not
like this feature should send a note to netview@tivoli.com to
explain how this affects them in real life. Maybe it should be
optional, or a separate entry in Netview Security. (IMHO)

2)  I'm not sure you can expect exact reproduction on the web client.
You might make sure that the box your browser is on has its display
set to the same resolution as the Server does, eg 1280x1024. But
it appears to me that the background and foreground are handled
separately, so the results of the two might be a tiny bit different.
I usually find that background gifs are great for marketing and
presentations, and for when the tour group comes through your ops
center, but in real life they usually just slow down responsiveness.
Operators soon learn to love the logical map you lay out for them.


Leslie A. Clark
IBM Global Services - Systems Mgmt & Networking

If anyone has any ideas, they would be appreciated.

I am running AIX 4.3.1 on Tivoli 3.6 and Netview 5.1.1
We just started using the web interface for monitoring
purposes. I have the following problems:

1. When a user acknowledges an interface on the web,
it also acknowledges the interface on the read/write

2. When the icons on the web interface are displayed
they have moved from the position they were in on the
r/w map. Example: I have the map of US as my
background, on the GUI Raleigh,NC is in NC. But, on
the web it is in KY. My users are having problems
finding the correct sites.

I have deleted the .gif files and rebuilt them and
have no problems with the colors or status changes.



Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web